The Key: Ethnic Communities Vote Heavily for Labour

By Sir Andrew Green,
Chairman, Migration Watch UK,
The Daily Telegraph,10 February, 2010

I rubbed my eyes with disbelief when I saw an article by Andrew Neather, a former speech writer for Blair, Blunkett and Straw, saying that mass immigration “didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000 … was to open up the UK to mass immigration”.

At last the truth was out. The public have known for years that we were building problems for ourselves but somehow it wasn’t quite respectable to mention it in polite company.

All that is changing fast as people wake up to the fact that we are now on course for a population of 70 million in 20 years’ time.

The Labour years have already seen an extra three million immigrants in Britain. If you add subsequent children, you are looking at the equivalent of half the population of London. These are just the official figures. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants range up to another one million.

How could this have happened in the face of growing public opposition? Was it a cock-up or a conspiracy?

Andrew Neather provided the answer last October — it was indeed due in considerable part to a small group of strongly motivated, highly placed political advisers whose aim was to change the nature of our country.

How did they expect to get away with this and what did they hope to achieve? They were helped by the mindset on the Left, which still regards immigration control as a rather unpleasant business much better avoided. The trades unions proved to be no trouble at all. They simply watched in silence as the interests of the working class were sacrificed on the altar of ideology.

Anyone who objected could be cowed by accusations of racism.

Labour got away with it for the best part of 10 years until the white working class started to abandon them in droves. This is a risk they must have seen. Indeed, Mr Neather revealed that the policy of mass immigration was surrounded by tight secrecy for this very reason.

So why take such a big risk with their traditional supporters? Could there have been a political prize to justify it? Here, I suspect, is the key.

According to research conducted for the Electoral Commission in 2005, the ethnic communities vote heavily in favour of Labour. Labour gets about 80 per cent support from the African and Caribbean vote, compared with 2-3 per cent for the Conservatives. For Asian voters, it is about 50 per cent to 10 per cent.

Since 1997, new Commonwealth immigration has reached nearly one million, almost all of it in England. Even if only half were to vote, this would mean roughly an extra 325,000 votes for Labour.

At the 2005 election, the two main parties were neck and neck. The new Commonwealth voters would, to some extent, go to Labour-held constituencies but even so, extra votes on this scale are not to be sniffed at – especially if you can get away with it.

Well they haven’t. Mr Neather’s revelations confirm what many have suspected for a long time. Labour have never been honest about the scale of immigration, nor serious about controlling it.

© Copyright of Sir Andrew Green

We use cookies to help us improve the website.

I Understand About Cookies



Keep up with the debate: If you would like us to keep you informed about the immigration debate, please subscribe here to receive regular updates.